Ellern Mede Barnet

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Our overall rating of responsive at Ellern Mede Barnet remained good. We assessed 5 quality statements. The service treated concerns and complaints seriously, investigated them and learned lessons from the results, and shared these with the whole team and wider service. The service met the needs of all patients, including those with a protected characteristic. Staff helped patients with communication, advocacy and cultural and spiritual support. Staff carefully planned patients’ discharge and worked with care managers and coordinators to make sure this went well.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Patients were able to feedback on the service, raise concerns and share ideas for improvement through the weekly community meeting. Patients used these meetings express any concerns and suggest improvements. Staff helped children and young people to stay in contact with families and carers. Family members told us they spoke regularly to their child by phone or through pre-arranged visits to the service. Staff encouraged children and young people to develop and maintain relationships both in the service and the wider community. Young people used Section 17 leave to go to the local shops and into town. One patient described the staff as ‘friendly’ and ‘supportive’.

Staff we spoke with recognised and respected the totality of people’s needs. They always took people’s personal, cultural, social and religious needs into account. They spent time getting to know each individual and to understand their needs and preferences

Staff were discreet, respectful, and responsive when caring for patients. The interactions we observed between staff and patients were kind and respectful.

The service held monthly parent meetings. Parents were able to feedback on the service and raise any concerns with the hospital manager. Staff held regular key working sessions with individual patients. This ensured they were aware of the needs and individual preferences of each patient and how these could be met by the staff team.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

Patients knew how to give feedback about their experiences of care and support at the hospital. Patients and carers knew how to complain or raise concerns. All patients felt able to provide feedback about their experience to the hospital. The service had feedback forms in communal areas, as well as a complaints poster. Patients had the hospital managers email address and were able to email any questions and queries directly to senior staff. Staff facilitated a community group meeting once a week for the hospital where young people could raise concerns about any issues affecting their stay at the hospital.

Managers shared feedback from complaints with staff and learning was used to improve the service. Staff told us complaints were discussed in handovers, clinical governance and staff meetings, this information was used to inform patient care.

We looked at records of complaints received by the hospital within the last 12 months and found that these were generally addressed within expected timescales, and people were kept informed if there were any delays.

The service collected feedback via an annual patient and carer survey. Survey results were collated, themes identified, and an action plan developed. Survey results for 2023 which was completed by 11 respondents showed that 62% of patients said they were satisfied with the overall care at the hospital. The service used compliments to learn, celebrate success and improve the quality of care. The service had received 26 compliments between March 2023 and March 2024 from patients, carers and other health professionals. Compliments included comments about positive treatment, staff support and collaborative working. The service held monthly parent/carer meetings. Minutes we reviewed demonstrated that parents could feedback any concerns or compliments at this meeting. Patients were able to raise requests, feedback and informal complaints in the weekly hospital community meetings. The meeting minutes showed changes were made as a result of patient feedback, such as choosing different outings and activities.

The service was accessible to patients with disabilities. There was a lift available and an evacuation chair for the stairs in an emergency. The service had access to interpreters when required. Written information could also be translated if a patient’s first language was not English, but this was not required for the current inpatient group. The activities and equipment provided were based on the interests and preferences of the patients. The hospital had access to a vehicle for excursions and driving patients to the hospital school. 1 carer told us they felt the service could do more to support their loved one with their autism.

Managers and staff were aware of their responsibilities to prevent discrimination and inequality and provide treatment and support in an equitable way to all patients. Staff told us how they supported individual patients with their sensory needs. Patients had a sensory passport which detailed how they wanted to be supported, for example using a door stop to prevent the slamming of a bedroom door which was distressful for the patient. For another patient staff used hand holds when administering their nasogastric feed. The service had an outside garden space that patients could access easily. All ward areas shared the garden space. Staff ensured this was used under supervision, especially if both children and adults were in the garden at the same time.

Feedback from commissioners and advocacy services indicated that the service met the care needs of patients well.

Patients were able to address their specific needs in their Patient Inclusion in Least Restrictive Intervention Management Plan (PILRIMP). Managers said they used patient’s and commissioners feedback to actively seek to improve access for people more likely to experience barriers or delays in accessing their care. Staff received training in equality, diversity and inclusion. Staff told us how they had supported patients with different genders, using preferred pronouns.

Patients were able to feedback any concerns they had about their care and treatment during one-to-one sessions and at the weekly community meeting. Parents/carers could raise any concerns directly with the hospital manager or at the monthly carers group.

Managers and staff were aware of possible discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage different groups of people using their services. Staff were aware of the need to respect patients’ pronouns, religious needs, and beliefs. Staff ensured patients had access to appropriate spiritual support. The service had a multi-faith room. The service supported patients to attend places of worship should they want this. Staff said they could raise concerns about disrespectful, discriminatory or abusive behaviour or attitudes towards patients. Staff we spoke to felt confident in raising issues with managers.

The provider had mandatory training in supporting LGBTQ+ patients, anti-discriminatory practice equality, diversity, and inclusion training which had been completed by 100% of staff. Staff told us how they had supported patients with different genders, using preferred pronouns. The provider complied with legal equality and human rights requirements, including avoiding discrimination, having regard to the needs of people with different protected characteristics and making reasonable adjustments to support equity in experience and outcomes.

Patients were supported to make informed choices about their care and plan for the future. Professionals worked together to support them to achieve their goals. Patients told us that they either had a discharge plan or knew what they had to do to progress whilst at the hospital and to be able to move on. Patients were able to participate in discussions about their future at ward rounds and discharge meetings. Feedback from patients who had been discharged from the service included ‘It’s thanks to you and Ellern Mede Barnet that I am doing well… I would have never been in this position without you’. A relative complimented ‘we can never thank you enough for everything you and your colleagues have done for our daughter. You have saved her life and given her the most incredible care while at Ellern Mede’.

Staff reported that they worked with patients collaboratively to make decisions about their care and treatment and prioritise what was important to them. Staff supported patients to develop their independence skills in preparation for transition from the service. The hospital had an annex with 3 beds which were used as a step-down unit to support patients who were approaching discharge. The annex had their own kitchen where patients were able to prepare their own meals.

Discharge planning was an active part of care and treatment. Staff worked in collaboration with patients, their parents/carers, community teams and NHS commissioners. Following the NHS England peer review the service had agreed to ensure that all admissions had a discharge plan in place. Prior to admission the service undertook pre-admission and formulation meetings with relevant stakeholders and provider collaborative case managers to confirm the goals of admission. The psychologist designed patients’ transition plans for leaving the service. We saw that patients and their families were involved in these plans. Due to the complexity of patient needs, the team took time to ensure that transition plans were person centred and met the needs and preferences of the individual. There was an independent mental health advocate (IMHA) service which visited the wards weekly. The IMHA provided support to young people such as attending their ward round and Care Programme Approach meetings and supporting them to understand their rights and discharge plans.